A woman from New Albany, Indiana recently won a $1.5 million judgment from a medical malpractice lawsuit that she filed after losing most of her intestines due to an allegedly negligent medical decision.

The woman, Michelle Wells Fischer, developed a permanently disabling disorder—a condition known as “short gut syndrome,” which is as ghastly as it sounds—after doctors removed most of her intestines during emergency surgery in 2003, according to a report from the News and Tribune.

The emergency surgery was necessary because the woman’s surgeon, Dr. William H. Garner, had postponed her scheduled surgery based on new medical information.

Fischer had originally seen Dr. Garner in June of 2003, complaining of severe abdominal pain. At the time, Fischer was an otherwise healthy 21-year-old who was working as a special education teacher.

At her first appointment, which occurred on a Friday, Dr. Garner allegedly recognized the need for surgery, but decided to delay it until the following Monday.

This decision, however, proved costly, as Fischer was taken to the hospital two days later and had to have emergency surgery to remove most of our intestines due to her development of ischemic bowel disease, also known as dead bowel.

Most humans have roughly 22 feet of small intestine, but Fischer’s emergency surgery left her with only a few feet of working intestine, which causes her to experience constant hunger and bloating.

In her personal injury claim, Fischer contended that she would have been able to keep much more of her intestines if she had been able to receive surgery on the day after she was diagnosed with the life-threatening condition.

Apparently, the delay may have allowed her condition to progress to the point where it compromised most of her stomach.
A jury in Clark County, Indiana agreed with Fischer’s version of the story, and issued a $1.5 million verdict that is believed to be the second largest jury verdict in the history of Clark County.

Despite this lofty sum, Fischer will only be able to receive about $1.25 from Dr. Garner (or, more specifically, his insurance company) due to Indiana medical malpractice laws that place a cap on damages in such claims.

Still, the money will go a long way towards paying for Fischer’s pain and suffering, although she will likely be racked with large medical bills for the rest of her life as she struggles to live in her compromised condition.

A routine colonoscopy turned into a health nightmare for Nevada man, but his recent $104 million verdict in a product liability lawsuit may ease some of his pain.

This week, a Nevada jury found a major drug company liable for an outbreak in hepatitis among people who took colonoscopies in 2007. The outbreak occurred at a few different outpatient colonoscopy clinics owned by a doctor who is also facing criminal charges.

According to a report in the Chicago Tribune, Michael Washington, a 71-year-old Air Force veteran, contracted hepatitis C during a simple colonoscopy procedure.

In his complaint, Washington claimed that the drug company and health care company named in the suit, Teva Parenteral Medicines Inc. and Baxter Healthcare Corp., encouraged doctors to reuse large vials containing the strong anesthetic propofol in colonoscopy procedures.

Under his theory, Washington said that the companies put profit over safety by reusing the anesthetic vials, which posed a danger of spreading blood-borne illnesses in successive patients.

Due to his disease, Washington alleged that he faced four years of high medical costs and physical uncertainty, and that the episode put “untold strain” on his marriage, which had lasted for 31 years before the incident.

A jury in Clark County, Nevada sympathized with Washington, and awarded him $14 million in compensatory damages for the expenses he incurred in treating and dealing with hepatitis C.

In addition, the jury punished Teva Parenteral Medicines Inc. for its transgression by awarding Washington and his wife $60 million in punitive damages. To add more meat to the verdict, Baxter Healthcare Corp. was also forced to pay the couple $30 million worth of punitive damages.

In their defense, the embattled companies admit that Washington was mistreated, but they claim that the decision to reuse the vials of propofol was the doctor’s decision, and that they would never promote such a potentially dangerous practice.

Moreover, the defendants expressed their displeasure with the size of the verdict, which they believe reflects a “broken” legal system in Nevada that takes advantage of wealthy defendants.

A personal injury attorney for the defendants noted that this case represents the third settlement in Nevada worth more than $100 million in a product liability case.

This decision also came on the heels of a $500 million verdict leveled against Teva last year in a case where a school administrator contracted hepatitis C in another colonoscopy procedure. Teva has appealed this decision.

Despite Teva’s claims that the verdict was unjustly large, the spate of hepatitis C cases in Nevada was easily preventable, and Nevada jurors wanted to make sure that other companies didn’t make the same mistakes again.

Thus, the theory behind the large punitive damages figures is that, the higher the punishment, the less likely it is that other companies will make similar boneheaded mistakes.

Although more than five years have passed since Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, victims of allegedly negligent medical care are still seeking justice through a recent personal injury lawsuit.

This week, a trial will begin in a class action lawsui filed against Memorial Hospital Center of New Orleans and its corporate parent, Tenet Healthcare, for personal injuries and death caused at the hospital in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

According to sources, the lawsuit alleges that the hospital’s poorly designed electrical backup system, which was flooded after the hurricane, and flawed plans for evacuating patients led to an unreasonably high patient death rate.

After the hurricane struck New Orleans, the bodies of 45 patients were found at Memorial Hospital, which represented a number of fatalities that was far higher than those found at other area hospitals.

One factor that the plaintiffs claim led to these deaths was the hospital’s loss of power and subsequent absence of air-conditioning after the storm, which created temperatures as high as 100 degrees inside the hospital. This increase in heat was particularly dangerous for older patients.

The plaintiffs allege that the hospital’s emergency backup electrical system failed because the hospital had ignored recommendations to move the system above the ground floor, where it was susceptible to flooding.

Prior to the storm, the facility had considered installing pumps around the electrical system to remove water after a major hurricane, but determined that the work would be too costly, and did not perform the recommended maintenance.

In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs also allege that Tenet Healthcare effectively abandoned the facility and failed to provide the necessary logistical support for evacuating patients.

In its defense, Tenet Healthcare claims that it hired private helicopters to help evacuate patients, but officials at the hospital claim that the helicopters were sent at least 24 hours after the hospital had requested them.

Sources indicate that Tenet spent more than $1 million after the storm on buses, ambulances, and aircraft for the six different medical facilities it owns in the New Orleans region.

The plaintiffs are hoping for a particularly lucrative personal injury settlement, as Tenet Healthcare has very deep pockets. The company had a total operating revenue of more than $9 billion in 2010.

The lawsuit has also raised questions about the country’s failure to have adequate emergency response requirements for American hospitals. This trend, however, appears unlikely to change, as the President’s latest budget proposal will cut spending on emergency preparedness at hospitals by at least 10 percent.

Hospitals can be remarkably hectic places, even when the weather is behaving. If you or someone you know suffered an injury due to negligent treatment by a doctor or nurse, you may be able to file a personal injury claim.

Contact a local injury lawyer today to explain your situation and ask about your legal options.

A terrible mistake recently made by a veteran surgeon has led to a push for major reforms in the practices of American surgeons. While medical malpractice lawsuits provide some relief for victims of bad medicine, precautionary measures before surgery might help save thousands of people from personal injury.

The botched medical procedure occurred when Dr. David Ring of Massachusetts General Hospital performed a mistaken surgery to treat carpal tunnel syndrome on a the left hand of a 65-year old woman.

Unfortunately for the patient, she suffered from trigger finger, not carpal tunnel, and the surgeon failed to perform the correct procedure which would have straightened the affected ring finger on her left hand.

Dr. Ring noticed his error minutes after he performed the unnecessary surgery, and promptly apologized to the patient. He also offered to perform the correct surgery shortly thereafter. The woman, displaying a remarkable amount of mercy, allowed him to proceed. To the relief of both parties, the second surgery was a success.

Sources that detailed the story say that several last minute glitches led to the unnecessary surgery. First, the scheduled operating room was switched at the last minute. In addition, that day saw an abnormally busy surgery schedule which led to failures in standard safety protocols before the surgery began.

Dr. Ring, who courageously admitted to his mistakes in the New England Journal of Medicine, says that he now views pre-surgery safety protocols as an absolutely necessary step for surgeons. According to reports, many doctors find these protocols to be unnecessary burdens.

Both fellow doctors and patient safety advocates have responded positively to Dr. Ring’s call for a heightened emphasis on pre-surgery safety checklists. Not only will enhanced safety protocols decrease doctors’ liability in medical malpractice lawsuits, they will also likely improve the overall surgical outcomes for many patients.

Further, Dr. Ring has stated that the feedback to his public admission of error has been “incredibly positive” and meant a great deal to him, “considering how devastating this was for me and my patient.”

Dr. Ring’s lesson rings particularly true in today’s medical world, where shoddy treatment routinely leads to personal injury lawsuits. According to a medical injury report by the Department of Health and Human Services, roughly 14 percent of Medicare patients are harmed by mistakes made during treatment.

Common types of medical malpractice revealed by the study include excessive bleeding after surgeries, complications from the prescription of incorrect medicines, and urinary tract infections due to the misuse of catheters.

Most surprisingly, these researchers estimated that negligent medical treatment contributes to roughly 180,000 patient deaths each year. In order to avoid the harsh effects of mistreatment, some experts recommend bringing someone with you to the hospital to help you voice your concerns, and knowing all your medications.

If you or someone you love has been victimized by medical malpractice, contact a local injury lawyer today to learn more about your legal rights.

A Minnesota jury recently awarded nearly $5 million to the family of a woman who bled to death after a cesarean section went horribly awry. According to reports, the grieving family sued Monticello-Big Lake Community Hospital under theories of medical malpractice and wrongful death.

The story that led to the personal injury lawsuit is tragic, to say the least. Soon after giving birth to her first child, Claudia Calcagno of Albertville, Minnesota began hemorrhaging and died a few hours later.

The attorneys for the woman’s family claimed that her doctors were not able to perform a life-saving surgery because the hospital was unable to provide enough blood for the necessary transfusion. Tragically, the attorneys claimed that the hospital had failed to keep a steady supply of A negative blood, the type needed to save Mrs. Calcagno.

In an even worse oversight, the attorneys further claimed that the hospital did, in fact, have some of the right type of blood available, but the hospital staff failed to give the doctors this information.

Two doctors were named in the lawsuit, but they were found innocent. Instead, the jury leveled the hefty penalty against the hospital itself. The jury award included money for loss of consortium for Mrs. Calcagno’s husband and past and future economic losses.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys had argued that the doctors on duty should also be found negligent, but the hospital’s lawyers successfully argued that the doctors on duty had been operating under the strict orders of their superiors, and therefore not personally liable.

Mrs. Calcagno’s fatal delivery occurred in January of 2008 when she was 41 weeks pregnant. Her labor lasted for several hours before the obstetrician decided to perform the cesarean section.

In a heart-warming end to a tragic tale, her young son Vico survived the birth and is now perfectly healthy. With the aid of Vico’s grandparents, Vico’s father has decided to stay at home for his son’s first few years.

While multi-million dollar personal injury awards are relatively unusual across the country, they have been awarded before in Minnesota, as well as several other states.

Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident. In fact, medical malpractice results in tens of thousands of personal injuries each year. On occasion, these injuries are severe enough to lead to death.

Medical malpractice may arise from misdiagnoses, inappropriate medical treatment for your particular condition, or faulty medicine prescriptions. As a result of these potential errors, you are entitled to protect your rights as a patient and seek injury compensation if you believe you  have been mistreated by a physician.

If you or a loved one has been injured as a result of negligent medical treatment, contact a local injury lawyer today to learn more about your legal rights.

The United States Supreme Court agreed to hear a landmark case that will decide whether people can file personal injury lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies if vaccines are found to be the cause of health problems.

The case of Hannah Bruesewitz, who started having seizures after a series of vaccines, could set a sweeping precedent over an ongoing debate within the U.S. about the risks and benefits of vaccines.

The Supreme Court will decide if it is legal for consumers to sue vaccine producers outside of a special forum set specifically to protect drug makers from this type of lawsuit. The court will also take into account matters of liability and if drug makers are producing the safest possible vaccines.

In 1986 Congress established a special “forum,” nicknamed The Vaccine Court, to allow pharmaceutical companies to steadily release vaccines with fewer concerns about lawsuits of the kind the Bruesewitzes filed against Wyeth Laboratories, reports CNN.

Hannah Bruesewitz was born in 1992 outside Philadelphia. She was described as healthy by her parents until she was given DPT shots as an infant. The shots combine vaccines for diphtheria, pertussis (whooping cough) and tetanus. After the shots, the Bruesewitzes found Hannah started having seizures and is now developmentally disabled.

The lawsuit claims Wyeth Laboratories, the producer of the DPT vaccines and now a part of Pfizer, did not make the potential health dangers caused by the vaccines clear enough for parents to make an educated decision about immunizing their children.

While the family’s initial claim was rejected by the “Vaccine Court,” the Bruesewitzes sought an audience with federal courts, under the justification that the side effects that Hannah experienced could have been avoided with better drug production, according to CNN.

But a federal court ruled in favor Wyeth, under the ruling that any design defects in the vaccines given to Hannah were still protected under the 1986 law that established the “Vaccine Court.” Wyeth actually urged the Supreme Court to hear the case despite their victory in the appeals court.

Drug manufacturers, including Wyeth, have contended before that vaccines are not profitable, so the legal protection from suits allows them to make them readily available to people without excessive threats to their bottom line. The companies also said instances where side effects caused harm are few.

“After exhausting administrative remedies in the vaccine program, children in Georgia who are injured by vaccines may bring design defect claims against vaccine manufacturers when the use of safer alternative vaccines could have avoided their injuries,” the Supreme Court wrote to explain why they will hear the case.

“By contrast, Hannah Bruesewitz and children like her … may be precluded from pursuing identical design defect claims even when the same safer alternative vaccines could have avoided their suffering too,” the Supreme Court wrote.

According to a report from the Albany Times-Union, a woman born in 1984 sued Bellevue Maternity Hospital for severe brain damage she suffered during birth.

The medical malpractice lawsuit claimed that Tiffany Busone, 24, suffered cerebral palsy because of improper resuscitation after she was oxygen-deprived in the delivery room.

Mentally, Busone has above-average intelligence - but physically, she suffers. She uses a wheelchair and doesn’t have fully developed motor skills.

The law firm representing Busone has called this settlement the largest personal injury verdict in upstate New York.

The answer is yes - and one young girl and her family have experienced it first hand.

According to ABC News, six of every 10 babies born acquires jaundice in the first few weeks of life - so when Lexi Haas showed symptoms at just three days old, her doctor was not worried.

Now, seven years later, Lexi is having surgeries to combat a movement disorder from which she now suffers - as a result of jaundice when she was an infant.

The brain injury condition Lexi has could have been avoided with one simple test - but she never received that test, said her mother Susan.

Now, at age seven, Lexi’s mental functions are completely in tact, but for her, voluntary physical movement is an impossibility.

Her mother estimates that medical costs throughout Lexi’s life will cost upwards of $25 million. The family can hire an injury lawyer and seek damages from the hospital or doctor that might be responsible for Lexi’s condition.

According to an investigation by the Hearst Corporation, they found that about 200,000 deaths are because of medical mistakes and mishaps each year.

The report is titled “Death by Mistake,” and it shows preventable medical errors and infections spread throughout hospitals may be responsible for thousands of deaths annually.

Back in 1999 when the federal government came out with their report about medical malpractice called “To Err is Human,” many hoped it would spur some changes and improvements in the world of medicine. Unfortunately, Hearst’s new report shows that hospitals, medical organizations and the federal government have done little to change safety/health practices.

According to CBS News, here are seven factors that cause or contribute to the thousands of medical deaths yearly:

• Operating on the wrong organ or wrong side of the body
• Improper medication (wrong doses, patients given meds they’re allergic to)
• Miscommunication or no communication between doctors and patients  before surgery
• Bad documentation
• Sleep-deprived doctors/surgeons
• Illegible handwriting
• Low nurse-to-patient ratios

Patients can help doctors and hospitals improve medical malpractice statistics by opening a higher level of communication with their care providers. Doctors and surgeons can help by talking to patients before they are sedated for procedures - to make sure everyone is on the same page.

Doctors and hospitals don’t want to face injury lawsuits, and no one wants to see the statistics of 200,000 deaths by medical mistake. If you’re a doctor or a patient, take a little extra time and care, and see what you can do to help!

In Winter Park, Fla., a family has enlisted the help of a personal injury lawyer lawyer to file charges against a dentist for allegedly dropping dental tools down the throat of their 90-year-old family member - twice.

According to a Chicago Tribune article, Dr. Wesley Meyers dropped an implant screwdriver down Charles Geal Jr.’s throat in 2006 and a mini-wrench in 2007. After several invasive surgeries to remove the tools, Geal never fully recovered. He died in 2007, but there is no known direct correlation with the dental mishaps.

Meyers was fined by the state for his mistakes, and was found negligent - but now the family is seeking more compensation. To drop anything down a patient’s throat beyond the point of recovering it is awful - but to do it twice is even worse.

According to a report from the Miami Herald, colonoscopies performed in Chattanooga, Tenn. may have resulted in the patients being exposed to HIV.

The patients are currently awaiting a response from the VA to see if they will be receiving compensation for their damages in this medical malpractice situation.

Unfortunately, the responsible parties are not offering to pay out the damages they caused in this lawsuit, though this is a clear example of medical malpractice in action. The lawsuit has resulted in congressional hearings and new patient safety standards from the VA, but the organization claims there is no way to trace the evidence back to the VA.

The victims exposed to HIV are represented by  a personal injury attorney in the case.

President Barack Obama returned to his home city this week - Chicago, Ill. - to address the American Medical Association on the topic of health care reform.

Obama wants to let doctors do what they are trained to do and be doctors - not bureaucratic businessmen that are constantly thinking about money making and worried about lawsuits.

According to a CNN report, Obama said the current health care model focuses more on the quantity of heath care patients received rather than the quality of care. Obama said to his audience of physicians that this model “pushes you, the doctor, to see more and more patients even if you can’t spend much time with each; and gives you every incentive to order that extra MRI or EKG, even if it’s not truly necessary.  It is a model that has taken the pursuit of medicine from a profession — a calling — to a business.”

According to Obama’s speech, the extra tests and scans called for by doctors are often unnecessary precautions, used by doctors to lessen the risk of a medical malpractice lawsuit.

If the system is reformed in the manner that Obama is proposing, there would be protection for doctors, allowing them to do their jobs more efficiently and effectively.

Obama did say he does not want to put a cap on medical malpractice lawsuits, but he wants to make sure that patient safety comes first and allow doctors to be the “healers” they are meant to be.

So what does that mean for the health care system of America? Obama is still making his case for universal care - a topic on which doctors are still torn.

The President was very well received by the audience of doctors at the AMA in Chicago, but I think some of the country’s health care professionals are still wary of the changes that might be coming their way.

Have you ever had a doctor tell you that the potential outcome of whatever illness you’re suffering from is far worse than you expected or than it should be?

Take, for example, a friend of mine who recently dropped a cardboard box on her foot, got a paper cut from it, and found herself in the hospital the next day.

The cut got infected and swelled badly - causing the emergency room doctor to put my friend on antibiotics. The doctor also said that if the swelling didn’t go down and the infection didn’t subside, amputation might be necessary.

You can imagine my friend’s reaction - “Amputation from a paper cut?! You have to be kidding!” - and the doctor admitted that an outcome like that was incredibly unlikely. Okay, so then why did she even say it, and is she allowed to give drastic prognoses like that?

Legally, yes. There’s no way to know if the doctor truly believed that amputation would be necessary, but if the infection did get bad enough (it didn’t), amputation may have been a valid solution. That doesn’t make it right to say so, though.

Whether doctors scare patients on purpose remains to be seen - the situation and doctor in question vary, of course. But these scare tactics are not considered medical malpractice.

Sometimes doctors say things that scare patients without even realizing it - it’s like when you think out loud and other people hear you. You think it, but that doesn’t necessarily mean you believe it. If this happens to you, say something to your doctor - ask them to clarify, and ask them why they said what they said.

If some kind of injury happens to you because of a procedure, shot, surgery or technique a doctor uses on you, don’t hesitate to get in touch with a personal injury lawyer and ask questions about medical malpractice.

Words aren’t enough to press any charges against a medical professional, but as in anything, actions speak louder than words. If you think you’re a victim of medical malpractice, ask a local personal injury lawyer.

A Kentucky man and his wife have sued the man’s doctor for amputating his penis without his authorization.

The doctor’s lawyer said the procedure was considered “medically necessary” and authorized by the patient because the patient gave the doctor permission to perform “any medical procedure deemed necessary”.

The 61-year-old man went in for a scheduled circumcision to treat inflammation. The medical malpractive lawsuit claims the doctor removed the man’s penis during the surgery without consulting the man or his wife.

The doctor’s lawyer said the penis amputation was authorized because the man had cancer and there was “no reasonable option other than to have the cancer removed”.

The man and his wife are seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages from the doctor, the doctor’s company and the anesthesiologist.

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, among other news outlets, is reporting that the state of Illinois will reconsider its state law providing limitations on the non-economic damages awarded as part of medical malpractice jury verdicts.

Though the state has twice struck down medical malpractice laws, most recently in 1997, state lawmakers wrote a new law in 2005 that caps non-economic damages (money for things like “pain and suffering”) to $500,000 for doctors and $1 million for hospitals.  However, Cook County Circuit Court Judge Diane Larsen ruled in favor of the mother of young Abigaile LeBron, who suffered extreme mental impairment and cerebral palsy as the result of injuries sustained during her birth, and in fact declared the medical malpractice caps unconstitutional, as statutory limits interfered with the duty of juries to award what they deemed appropriate verdicts.

This question of the separation of legislative and judicial powers will be at the heart of the Supreme Court’s decision this fall, and makes it fairly likely that the cap will be overturned once again, as the court previously ruled in favor of this separation both times it overturned malpractice caps.

There is no date set for the case to go to trial, but it could happen as early as next month, the Post-Dispatch reports.